Image: Photo by Brett Jordan on Unsplash
Indic philosophical systems (Darshans) is an umbrella term for schools of thought that emerged from ancient India. Philosophical schools such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism are all part of it. Darshan means “a way of seeing” and that is precisely what these systems offer, a frameworks to see reality clearly.
The Indic tradition has always embraced multiplicity and therefore multiple perspectives and multiple definitions of reality are encouraged. Yet at the core of every darshan lies an attempt to answer four fundamental questions:
- What is the problem?
- What causes the problem?
- What does a problem-less state look like?
- How does one get there?
Anyone who has studied these systems knows they are largely inductive, grounded in strong epistemology, and rigorous in addressing these questions.
•••
So what is the problem?
Before moving further, the problem must be clearly understood, otherwise there is no point continuing. Across Indic schools, the problem is twofold:
Suffering (Dukkha) and the cyclical nature of Existence (Samsara).
Suffering is further classified into three broad categories:
- Bodily suffering: disease, aging, decay, death
- External suffering: people, relationships, family, work, social stress
- Natural suffering: calamities beyond personal control
All suffering, regardless of form, arises from dissatisfaction and unending desire, a desire directed toward oneself, others, or the universe. The desire for beauty, intelligence, wealth, health, success, recognition. The desire for better work, better pay, better relationships, better mornings, better meals.
One desire after another is what we use as a clutch to move in life.
Desire functions in only two ways: it is either fulfilled or it is not, and both outcomes at the end, only produce suffering. Unfulfilled desire leads to frustration and despair while a fulfilled one breeds hunger for repetition, escalation, and more.
To “receive” this teaching simply means recognising it as a lived fact, not simple a philosophy, but observation. The modern world is the constant buildup of stress, followed by attempts to escape it.
•••
The Shortcut to Knowledge
Instead of unpacking the metaphysics of every school, here is the shortcut.
The end of suffering comes through Light (Prakasha), which in the Indic system means Knowledge. Not information alone, but clarity through experience and therefore right knowledge is considered to be information plus experience but experience is what matters most. Experience of this knowledge is what dissolves suffering and allows happiness within a finite world.
The Brhadaranyaka Upanisad which is the oldest among the Indic system makes a ruthless point about this:
Yatra veda aveda bhavanti
In the state of true experience, even the Vedas / Upanishads or any teachings are no longer “needed” in the usual sense anymore. Which means that scriptures, concepts, and explanations are merely tools and when direct seeing happens and the tool has done its job, it can safely be dropped away.
Each school of thoughts within the Indic philosophical system has its own ontology and epistemology, but Yoga stands out as the practical backbone connecting them all. It offers concrete methods: Things to do (Yama), Things not to do (Niyama), Breathworks (Pranayama), Meditation (Dhyana) which are all connected tools to quieten the mind, stabilise the prana, and shift awareness into the present.
Unfortunately modern yoga largely misses this point and it is taught from a very physical point of view, which makes no sense to me because it is the thought that turns into speech, and the speech is what compels action.
Just doing poses can keep you healthy, but you won’t reap the full benefit of Yoga if the daily habits of being, the thought itself isn't being trained along with the body.
But once done properly , Yoga bring the mind from a dynamic state to a more static state of being in the moment where one realises that:
The present is present in each breath and that is where the mind must rest.
Different schools propose different routes, some like the Sankhya School of thought do it through radical separation while others like the Advait Vedant school of thought through radical unity but all points to the same insight: understanding objects, their nature, and how to relate to them.
•••
The Nature of Objects
Every object has two core properties and these are not optional traits or philosophical add-ons. They are structural and if you remove either one, the whole concept of object collapses.
Experience (Core Property #1)
Experience here is not subjective preference, It is structural and has a threefold quality:
- Space (desa) - where the object is differentiated
- Time (kala) - when the object is differentiated
- Span (ayu) - how much continuity the object maintains across space and time
It must be noted that without span, experience would fragment into isolated instants with no continuity and it is what allows an object to persist long enough to be recognised, interacted with, and remembered and it is also what makes an object finite.
Change (Core Property #2 and Essence)
Change is not an additional feature layered on top of experience but a binding force that:
- prevents experience from freezing
- makes space, time, and span meaningful
- ensures an object is never fully identical to itself across moments
Without change, experience would be a static snapshot and with change, it becomes a continuous movie.
This same continuity also reveals something uncomfortable: being an object means being temporary and to exist as an object is to be in constant motion, never settled, never complete and this is that feeling of vulnerability and wanting we all feel at different moments in our lives.
Having identified what makes an object an object, the category becomes obvious. Anything that can be experienced across space and time and whose essence is change qualifies and therefore everything you can see, touch, taste, or think about falls into this domain.
Change is not what happens to objects but it is what objects are, change is the essence of an object.
Look closely and this definition also applies to your own body and mind, every part of the body is experienced, and it changes and the mind does the same. One day it is joyful, another day restless, then dull, then excited again, the Prolonged sadness that becomes depression and the Prolonged happiness that becomes bliss.
•••
The Error
Once the nature of objects is understood, the mistake becomes obvious.
We Humans seek infinite happiness from finite, changing objects and this is where lies the fundamental error.
The excitement of a new job fades quickly, possessions lose their shine eventually, relationships evolve or break, beliefs, traditions, identities are nothing but objects, they arise, persist for a time, and change and expecting permanence from impermanence is not optimism, it is just highly illogical and therefore suffering persists not because life is cruel, but because this fact is not fully understood and internalised.
True happiness can never be found in objects.
True immortality, can never be found in objects.
When this knowledge deepens, not as an idea but as lived clarity, the grip of objects also weakens and the clarity of the fact shines forth that no object, including the body or the mind, can end suffering. At best, they offer temporary states and once this is seen, the search for happiness cannot continue in the same direction.
•••
The Absolute Truth
If everything that appears in experience is an object, then the source of experience cannot itself be an object. If the body is experienced, it cannot be the experiencer and if the mind, its thoughts, moods, and fluctuations are experienced, it too cannot be the experiencer and yet experience undeniably happens.
So the question becomes unavoidable: what is it that experiences, if everything we usually call “me” is experienced?
Many assume the mind must be the subject but the mind changes, pauses, reacts, and can be observed and therefore something observable cannot be the final observer. I see correlation is often mistaken for causation here.
The body–mind system participates in experiences, but it does not originate it just as a car and its engine are involved in motion but do not experience the journey but the the rider who does and this is where the Indic systems make their decisive move, and this is where the two-fold knowledge framework appears.
The first part is understanding the true nature of objects, knowing what they are, how they function, and why they cannot provide permanence and this much we have already established.
The second part is the knowledge of the self. Once all objects are exhausted, once the body, mind, emotions, and identities are clearly seen as objects, what remains behind is something that which never appears as an object, yet without which no experience could occur.
This is the subject.
The subject is not something you perceive but it is that by which all perception happens and it does not change with moods, thoughts, or circumstances. It is present when the mind is active and when it is quiet and it does not age with the body, nor does it fluctuate with emotion.
The Indic systems call this the Absolute, not as a belief or metaphysical claim, but as a necessity and without it, experience itself becomes impossible.
A useful analogy is that of a mirror and light. Objects and thoughts are like reflections in a mirror, the mirror and the reflections are objects but without light, no reflection is ever seen and the light does not appear as a reflection, yet it makes all reflections visible.
In the same way, cognition arises in the mind, but awareness/subject is what makes cognition known. Objects can be experienced but they cannot experience themselves and this is the difference between living and non-living. A mirror can reflect an image, but it does not know it is reflecting until Awareness/light turns reflection into experience.
Once this is seen, the hierarchy becomes clear that the Objects change but the subject does not.
And this is why the search for happiness ends here when one stop trying to find it in the changing objects and use the knowledge of the subject as a source of unending bliss.
It is when mistake stops and life begins.
•••
What to Do, Practically
Once this is seen, the question is no longer metaphysical, it becomes practical. If happiness cannot be extracted from objects, and if the subject is already complete, then action no longer needs to be driven by lack of objects and it does not mean Life stops, it simply mean that our action continues as usual but its motive changes.
At this point, the Indic systems converge on the same instruction: act without clinging to outcomes and engage fully, but do not turn results into currency for happiness. And it must be noted that this is not some ethical advice, It is psychological hygiene one needs to keep In order to end suffering.
Modern neuroscience arrives at the same conclusion from a different route and they say that dopamine and motivation, is not meant to be tied exclusively to rewards or outcomes and when motivation is anchored only to results, the system becomes unstable and the whole thing comes crashing down.
Studies have shown that intrinsic motivation is created when dopamine is linked to the process itself: the act of doing, learning, building, exploring and not trying to win or trying to arrive somewhere and when one does that, simply does things for the joy of doing, intrinsic motivation after that comes purely from simply engaging with things.
This is exactly what the age old Bhagavad Gita calls "Karma yoga (action without attachment to results)". Not resignation or passivity but precision and when action is done for the sake of action, without psychological dependence on outcomes, effort becomes sustainable and the nervous system stabilises.
The body has to adapt to this shift. Years of outcome-driven conditioning do not disappear overnight but when motivation is reoriented toward experience rather than reward, life stops feeling like resistance and life flows freely as it supposed to be.